Time limits, extensions and late claims
Crime lower
1SCC A8.3; CBAM 9.4.9.9All claims should be submitted within three months of the end of the matter, case or duty session. Where a warrant for an arrest is issued the three-month time limit runs from six weeks after the date of issue.
9.10However, under the contract there is no specific sanction for a failure to comply with this requirement. CBAM 9.4 does not appear to be justified by the terms of the SCC. Other paragraphs of the specification provide for the rejection of a claim but this does not appear in SCC A8.3. However SCC ST 14.5 and ST 24 and 25 contain provisions to deal with persistent breaches.
Crown Court cases
2Remuneration Regulations 2013. The issue is considered at CCFG Appendix A.9.11Claims must be submitted within three months of the conclusion of the proceedings.
3Remuneration Regulations 2013 reg 5(3).When time begins to run
Confiscation cases
9.12Although the LAA may be prepared to entertain a claim for the gradu-ated fee element earlier, time for the delivery of the bill runs from the end of confiscation proceedings. This is because the representation order covers all the proceedings to which it relates.
4R v Taylor [2013] 2 Costs LR 374 disapproving of the earlier decision in R v Turnbull SCCO 86/12.Cases where an appeal is lodged
9.13There are differing decisions on whether time runs from the sentencing of a defendant, or from the time that advice on appeal is given. Surprisingly in
R v Dumbaya5[2012] 5 Costs LR 976. the costs judge held that, even if the advice was out of time, it was the delivery of that document that started the three-month time limit.
9.14To the opposite effect is the decision in
R v Fletcher,
6SCCO 85/12. that it was the acquittal or sentence that started the time running. This seems sounder in principle. Otherwise the calculation of the contribution payable by a client could be extensively delayed and there is no need for costs purposes to delay lodging the bill. If there is positive advice, and an appeal is lodged, the work may be claimed from the Registrar of Criminal Appeals; in other circumstances no additional fee is due.
Retrials
9.15Time runs from the end of a retrial.
7R v Hart-Badger [2013] 1 Costs LR 181.9.16For litigators it may be wise to delay the initial bill until it is clear if there is a trial and a retrial or a single longer trial which can have very different effects on the remun-eration payable.
Extensions
9.17It is good practice to seek an extension of time before the time limit expires but this is not essential.
8R v Clerk to the North Kent Justices ex p McGoldrick & Co (1996) 160 JP 30 on identical wording in the Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986.9.18Under Remuneration Regulations 2013 reg 31 any time limit may be extended, for ‘good reason’, and the bill will then be paid in full. This is a term of art and requires that there is no fault on the part of the practitioner. Bad management cannot justify the use of this provision.
9.19The requirement for a time extension will often arise out of the needs of the client so that the file has to be retained to deal with an urgent appeal or with co-defendants whose cases continue or because there are related proceedings in another (often civil) jurisdiction. The reason for delay must normally be outside the control of the practitioner. In
R v Grigoropolou and other cases
9[2012] 5 Costs LR 982. the judge indicated that bereavement, burglary, flood, serious illness, may be sufficient. The incorrect insertion of the concluding date of the case met the requirement in the leading case. Problems in obtaining responses from the CPS on page count were thought no longer to qualify. It is suggested that the highest proper page count should be inserted and appeal procedures be used as necessary.
9.20Under Remuneration Regulations 2013 reg 31(2) if there is no ‘good reason’, the time limit may in ‘exceptional circum-stances’ be extended, when a percentage reduction may be made in the amount billed. Because of the mechanical nature of the graduated fee schemes exceptional circumstances will be difficult to identify. When to disallow the entire claim would be a disproportionate sanction, exceptional circumstances may be found and a percentage reduction in the fees payable may be made.
9.21Each case will have to be considered on its own merits (
Grigor-opolou (above) developing the decision in
R v Lafayette10[2010] 4 Costs LR 650.). See also
R v Fletcher11SCCO 85/12. and
R v Turnbull12SCCO 86/12. where a deduction of 10 per cent was in each case thought to be proportionate.
9.22Sickness can amount to good reason for late submission if supported by suitable evidence. Otherwise it may be an exceptional circumstance.
13R v Aldridge SCCO 221/13.9.23An unintentional but careless delay of six to seven months in submitting a bill should not deprive a solicitor of disbursements to the value of £2,000 (in a total bill of £3,000). This amounted to exceptional circumstances.
14R v Cox SCCO 299/12.9.24An appeal on these issues lies to the costs judge. The SCCO has indicated that the time limits will, because of the need to calculate the value of a client’s contribution order, be more rigorously enforced than in the past.
9.25There is no power to reverse an extension of time once granted.
15R v Aldridge SCCO 221/13.